Pazouhandeh v. Salgar Construction Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pazouhandeh v. Salgar Construction Co.

112 So. 3d 151, 2013 WL 1918890, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7503

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 10, 2013

DocketNo. 5D10-470

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 112 So. 3d 151 (Pazouhandeh v. Salgar Construction Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pazouhandeh v. Salgar Construction Co., 112 So. 3d 151, 2013 WL 1918890, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7503 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

COHEN, J.

Abbas Pazouhandeh appeals from a final judgment awarding attorney’s fees. That judgment appears to grant each side fees related to a suit involving construction of a home, then set off the fees. Pazouhandeh notes the lack of a record, stating he will “rely on memory of the testimony that transpired at trial to the best of his abilities.” This does not comply with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(4), and thus, we are unable to accept the facts as set forth in Pazouhandeh’s brief.

Pazouhandeh argues that the court improperly determined the prevailing party issue. Without a transcript of the hearing, our review is limited to errors appearing on the face of that judgment. See Maslow v. Edwards, 886 So.2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). As there are no such errors, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI